Notice to Cure Unclear

(Decision submitted by Samuel J. Himmelstein of the Manhattan law firm of Himmelstein, McConnell & Gribben, attorneys for the tenant.) Landlord sued to evict rent-stabilized tenants. The notice to cure claimed that tenants had illegally sublet their apartment, illegally assigned their lease, didn't use the apartment as their primary residence, and otherwise violated their lease. Tenants argued that the notice was defective because it was unclear what steps they'd have to take to cure the violations. The court ruled for tenants. The notice wasn't specific enough, and it lacked corroborating facts. By alleging that tenants both sublet the apartment and assigned the lease, landlord made contradictory claims, so there was no way for tenant to cure. Also, the notice only alleged that the apartment wasn't tenants' primary residence---it didn't state any facts to support that claim.

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company v. Harris: NYLJ, p. 22, col. 3 (9/28/94) (Civil Ct. NY; Evans, J)